skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> If he hadn't dressed formally, the committee wouldn't have trusted him

I can't blame your friend for accommodating their foolish demands. He treated them no worse than they deserved for it, and refusing would have made it a waste of everyone's time.

> gone home after work and changed

I guess I'm wondering whether she thinks her coworkers are incapable of judging her genuine merit, or something else is going on.
I always thought the sky was dark for the same reason we don't see the bright center of the Milky Way at night: dust.

Space is mostly vacuum, but there is enough dust over the vast volumes to occlude light.
You can get insurance for anything if you are willing to pay the premium.
It's funny how some "mass stereyotypes" (like "men violent, women nurturing") tend to take longer to die. Let's look at some other "mass stereyotypes" that are no longer so accepable to say in civil discource:

• Women can't do maths (like at all, their brains are tiny and incabable of abstract thought) It's in the nature!

• Men can't look after babies, they'd probably hold them by their heads or something! It's in their nature!

• Jews are only concerned with money, it's in their nature!

• Women lack the mental capabilites for politics and shouldn't be allowed to vote, it's in their nature.

• Women are very emotional, and hence are unsuitable for high pressure jobs (high level political leader, CEO, doctor, military commander), they'd just have some sort of emotional break down when the going gets tough, it's in their nature.

• etc. etc. (I haven't even touched on non-noble people, black people, LGBT people, catholics, prodestands, muslims, etc. etc.)

All of these things have been said about natural differences between various groups, mostly due to what we now realise as massive biases. When one says "men are naturally violent" or "women are naturally caring", the burden is on you to show how this time it's different, rather than it being just another (false) statement born out of bias. All these claims had some sort of evidence behind them. The burden is on you to come up with a standard of evidence that supports your biased claim, but doesn't show that women are incable of high office (say).
(a side effect for carrying one on her belly for 9 months, perhaps?)

The fact that one partner can literally walk away has nothing to do with it?
Selling something for $150 off-contract isn't anything to get excited about when the developing world (India and China mainly) already has huge market penetration from the likes of Samsung, ZTE, SE etc.

Actually, $150 is waaaay too high for the developing world. You can get a kinda-OK Android phone for half that in places like Brazil.
Your original, short comment seems much clearer about the point you're trying to get across:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4597584
IT Architects in bonus-driven organizations
If you take a very naive view of what it means to be "winning", then sure. But I don't think such a view is ever warranted in business (heck, or even sports).

A team that is up by a few points heading into the final period, but has been thoroughly out-played and out-scored in the preceding period is not "winning" in the same way as a team that has been dominating for the entire game.

For a company (or team) to be truly "winning", they must be on a trajectory that will lead to long-term sustainability and growth. Nokia (their smartphone business, anyway) was on a downward trajectory, just like RIM (which, up until just a few years ago had a commanding lead over iOS and Android).

I could buy the idea that Nokia should have stuck with Meego, or even Maemo and pushed harder to make one of those platforms a commercial success. But the idea that Symbian was winning, under a non-naive definition of the term, is more or less a joke.
They were pushing the N97 back then. A lot of them. Unfortunately, it was the most overhyped "flagship" piece of crap they've ever produced. All those contract-bound customers who were sold an N97 between 2009 and 2011, betting on the "anti-iPhone", ran like hell as soon as their contracts expired.
I included them because they are facts, unlike the idea that men are inherently violent or women inherently nurturing.

But sure, keep guessing.
Citation needed? saying something like "all black people are idiots" or "you people are idiots" is racism.
Nothing depressing about that - it's part of what needs doing. The thing I sometimes find a bit depressing is that there's more money to be made selling tools to the miners than there is in the actual products. For instance, I bet patio11 could make way more money from consulting/seminars/books/courses/motivational speaking (haha, just kidding, sorry Patrick:-) than from AR, from how he's describing it.
Did you forget who developed git? So in this case it's fine ;)

But honestly, I also have a hard time finding a use case for this. The question I ask my self over and over again: why not mount an FTP share and point your origin to it? In fact I did something similar when I was still in university. My desktop computer had my central gip repo, I either pushed to it locally via the FS or remotely via SSH.

Anyways, good thing to have git over FTP but I predict that it will never get traction because it seems to be in part a reimplementation of git?! (At least that's what the github page suggests because every basic git cmd is explained but with some git-ftp prefix... ;))
From an American persoective, yes. Nokia was a titan everywhere but in American smartphones. They owned the low end, the owned the high end, and they owned everywhere in between.

Now they have completely lost the script on smartphones and are losing their grip on the dumb phones that have paid the bills for more than a decade.

There is no upside to be seen anywhere.
They took errr jerbs? (hat tip, south park).

Are you talking about affirmative action or quota hires as an institutionalized privilege of minorities? If so, then what about institutionalized discrimination of minorities?(eg education of the average black student at an inner-city school way underfunded, relative to the majority).

Even most proponents of AA are ready to concede that it should be done differently, but its not fair to rail against the evils of "reverse discrimination" without at least acknowledging present-day, ordinary structural discrimination.
And it is easy to show the fallacy of that. RIM/BlackBerry was winning too at the time.

The thing he missed is that the profits are a lagging indicator - they are the results of what you did in the past, not about the future. The companies in The Innovator's Dilemma had exactly the same profile - they had worked out how to be profitable and serve their customers well, right up to the point both fell off a cliff because what customers valued had changed.
love this article
I see many comments in this post where sexism is referred as "bad jokes" or things like this. This is the smaller part, and the sole that you can address with a campaign.

My point of view is focused on the sexism that is NOT blatant and obvious like that. Examples:

1) The male boss promotes a male instead of a woman not based solely on merits but for prejudice about the capabilities of women.

2) The male boss promotes a prettier woman worker even if another woman deserved it more.

3) The female boss promotes a male because she feels (without possibly fully understanding it) in competition with the pretty woman even if she deserved it more.

There are a shitload of cases like this, and this is the whole point, because the bad jokes can be addressed directly: they may be unpleasant, but there is an easy path to fight this behaviours. Instead the more subtle things that prevent a carrier from having the same chances of everybody else is where I would be more focused. And this stuff is not the one you can fight with being politically correct.
That's sort of like saying "the depressing truth about relationships is that you need to go out and meet people to get involved in one."

I take a lot of pride in promoting my products. Marketing is just storytelling, and when your story aligns with the needs of someone else, a transaction occurs.

Honestly, if you want to just write code all day (and there's nothing wrong with that) don't create a product - work for somebody else.
Political Correctness is great if you are a minority. It means you have similar rights to the powerful group. As a gay man, I know I can mention the gender of my spouse (male!) in a workplace environment without being worried about being fired (say). Straight people have always (more or less) been able to mention their spouse in the workplace without fear of repercussion. Now I can too! Political Correctness means I don't have to watch every word I say in the office! It's done wonders for my freedom of speech.
¿Qué es el Punto G?
TL;DR : not because this is easy but because it is less hard than the other way; 3rd order content is dealt with Glengarry Glen Ross style; “Mobile First” Design is “Good Design”.
Trendspotter you're mixing together a lot of thoughts into one bucket. "For example with our startup we were the first to hit a large, untapped or underserved market. But the lack of execution and growth was what killed it." So you were a startup. But you failed due to poor execution. Did poor execution make you not a startup? No, it made you a failed startup. "Again the main difference between startups is if they can execute the idea and get growth." What you're really saying here is the main difference between successful startups and failed startups. You're not defining a startup.

Good idea's don't really grow on trees or they'd be done more regularly. Again, all businesses need good execution or they'll no longer be businesses. All businesses need growth. So execution and growth aren't defining characteristics of a startup.
What groups? I haven't heard of any opposition to SpaceX. Heck, NASA contracts with them.
"most software developers didn't choose their profession out of a burning desire to become a marketer."

I agree, if you choose to be a pure software programmer type then of course you can be just that. You can work in a core team or do research in academia. But if you have an entrepreneur itch you have to learn marketing and sales. In fact its pretty fun once you begin to realize that marketing also has lot of intellectual fun in it. A/B testing, human psychology, data analysis etc.
50 Sombras de Grey
This works on big things. Not so much on little, cumulative ones.

Why did A make a tasteless joke about B's outfit? Because he was nervous and his dubious sense of humor got ahead of his judgment. But he didn't mean anything by it and said he's sorry B feels that way. Well everyone says stupid things sometimes. No actual harm done. B should lighten up, right?

That doesn't work.

http://therealkatie.net/blog/2012/mar/21/lighten-up/

Some things are problems only because they're part of a larger pattern. That's when we need to think outside of the individual domain.
Have a food allergy or intolerance? There's an app for that
Kibibyte doesn't make things clearer in this case. They aren't talking about whether the factor should be 1000 or 1024. The first poster said that kilobytes should be bytes * 1024. That is incorrect. The number of kilobytes is equal to the number of bytes / 1024, not bytes * 1024.
The vast majority of the 13,000 are going to be CSRs and CSR support staff/management.

The actual development team will be small in comparison.
It's like working out or writing. Do a little every day. And if you absolutely can't, delegate. Find someone who can.
> Recently it was reported that Apple and Google both spend more on intellectual property related activities than on research and development, and they spend a lot on research and development.

I hope this particular bit of FUD doesn't take off. The study that reported this accounted for e.g. the Motorola Mobility purchase as being a "intellectual property related activity." While IP was surely some part of the Motorola purchase, it also came with products, engineers, physical plant, etc. It's ridiculous to chalk up the $12 billion spent on the purchase to "intellectual property related activities" but that's exactly what the study did.

All the study says is that Apple/Google spend as much money buying technology as they do developing in house. Which is not news to anyone. Heck, many (most?) startups are driven by the prospect of an eventual exit in the form of an acquisition, and intellectual property is part of every such acquisition. Should you count all startups acquisitions as part of this supposedly undesirable Katrina-like expenditures on "intellectual property related activities?"
I built an online photobooth for the holiday season. Try it out?
www.snippic.com
It's an online photobooth, maybe it's something someone of you can use at a halloween party?I would to hear any feedback you may have. I learnt a bit of coding at Reddit Learning Prog sub reddit, and built my first prototype. The final webapp was built by a professional<p>The PopOut feature has been quite popular at parties I have tried Snippic at!<p>Thanks in advance.
There are few applications that require 100% of the code to be high performance. Most performance problems are of the "bottleneck" kind, so writing your entire app in a language like Python for that ease of development is smart. It gives you options to optimize that 1-2% of your code that is critical without incurring a development penalty on the other 98-99%.

GVR's tips can be seen as an escalation path for optimizing. Don't jump into C before you've actually optimized your Python, because you might not need to.

In 10 years of writing Python, I've yet to hit a point where I've needed to do that. I'm kind of looking forward to it, actually.
I agree! The trouble is, once i started telling the story as a parable, I got emotionally involved in telling the town's story instead of using it as a secondary device for making a primary point.

Thanks for the excellent feedback.
I think ardent feminists are focused on making realistic changes to reality, i.e. working with the reality that we have a great diversity of sexual identities, gender identities, and gender roles, rather than try to fight against it. Fair treatment of women and minorities does not entail erasing all differences until we are a uniform grey.
In desktop and servers, for about 5-6 years now Intel has mostly been in competition with itself. If it can't engineer faster parts, it can't get people to upgrade, which means no sales. I wouldn't worry about that too much.
wow.. shape recognition seems to be freaking awesome. How much time did you take to develop it?
Experience: a head injury made me a musical prodigy
Watch this for a great presentation discussing this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_HBRhcgeuQ

Not that they haven't gotten better. My point is that CPython has a different set of goals which makes it great for a reference implementation.
Your critique of rmc is a bit of a Catch-22: if everyone can agree that it's unjust sexism, then it's just making it "easy and risk-free so more people join." More controversial examples than that, though, and you'd see a bunch of people arguing it's not Really Sexism(tm).

To prove the point, here's some actual struggles against sexism. Racism will have to wait for another day.

1) Rape culture. A large proportion of women are the objects of nonconsensual sexual encounters. People make excuses for this, saying that it was not "legitimate rape" or arguing that lots of women "rape easy." Note that this isn't a super odd or rare occurrence pushed by hillbilly conservative legislators but happens in the highest seats of power, from candidates on the Presidential ticket trying to pass legislation only providing protections for "forcible rape" to the New York Times saying a gang-raped 11 year old child was sort of asking for it.

2) Access to healthcare. Many women are not covered for even the most basic protections. In some areas, a hospital is allowed to refuse access to abortions for women who have been raped or are victims of incest. While men have for ages been given insurance coverage for Viagra and baldness treatments, it was only recently that it was mandated that women should get coverage for birth control, to much wailing and gnashing of teeth. Probably worse of all, it's become incredibly difficult in many areas to get even a first trimester abortion. Those legislators banning abortion, I'll point out, are the same ones minimizing rape and opposing laws that enforce against gender discrimination in the workplace.

3) The glass ceiling and sexism in the workplace. Yes, they're real, and just because it's a bit more subtle than disallowing women to own property or making it legally impossible for a husband to be subject to legal penalties for raping his wife (which in the USA only ended in 1993) doesn't mean that they're not sexism.

4) Sexism in the home. People love to point out that women are more likely to have jobs than men now and more likely to have a degree, sometimes in an attempt to say "well aren't men the oppressed ones now?" But on top of those responsibilities, women still do a disproportionate amount of the housework in opposite-sex coupled homes. You might laugh and say "well what's 15 minutes of work extra a day, it's nothing compared to not being able to own property" but that kind of thing is deeply pernicious.

I'm sure you can also point out places where men are screwed by sexism in our society. And you know what? Those suck too, and everyone should oppose them just as much as sexism against women.
Yep. For one thing, their top programmer might have been able to do something besides fix other people's bleary-eyed bugs.
Obviously features are important but it turns out that most businesses simply want an easy to use platform that "just works." Most of the customers who switch from T&T to Optimizely start off by trying both concurrently and evaluating whether Optimizely has what it takes to supplant T&T. When their T&T contract comes up for renewal, they shift their entire budget to Optimizely.
0x10c (Notch's new game)
> [fat people] should be shamed, in other words encouraged to do something about it, to make a positive change in their lives!

Have you considered all possible alternatives and decided that this was the best thing you could possibly do for them? Or was it just kinda convenient to do what you've always wanted to do anyway?

Or, trying another tack, replace "fat" by "nerdy".

> I find the idea that I should limit my own freedom of speech just so that other people can continue living in ignorance, ridiculous.

Fat people pretty much all know they're overweight. Freedom of speech means specifically freedom from your local government censoring your speech; it doesn't mean you can be as offensive as you want without being called on it.
Yes, it does - but given one of the creatures is HORMONALLY ATTACHED to the child, which one do you think is more likely to walk away?

(Hint: statistical data has the answer...)
Heading to Washington DC to Talk APIs with Innovation Fellows
Conventional wisdom in 1995: "How does a predator avoid becoming prey? How does a company with 75% of its market increase share against well-funded rivals? It's simple: nobody ever stops working."

Workplace fashion in 2012: "Think how much they could have accomplished if they just worked 40 hour weeks!"

What do you think they'll think in 17 years?
This seems to be micro-analysing graphs and completely ignoring the prevailing public mood, and even the products.

Anybody any idea of how the Lumia 920 is likely to go? It seems like their marketing division (apart from the fake pictures) and hardware division etc are all on their game, and i can't imagine the phone being a flop.
Or do our sexist views make us believe men are more deserving of jail time? A good example is the way we look at a man raping a woman vs. a woman raping a man. The former is the most heinous crime one could commit, but the latter, in the eyes of many, isn't a big deal, if even a positive experience.
Thanks for taking the time, I appreciate the thought-out response. I completely see where you're coming from, and I hope I didn't sound too critical of you personally.

I do just want to comment on one tangent:

> However there was no one cultural atrocity which affected all women.

I don't think this is as big a difference as you do. There is no Holocaust, no singular event of great subjugation, in the history of African Americans.

The Atlantic slave trade and the ensuing institution of racial slavery wasn't an event. It happened day by day, one ship, one beating, one auction, one rape, one lynching at a time, generation by generation, for hundreds of years, well into the last century.

It is the same situation with women. No, no one ever decided to round up all the females and shoot them; but day by day, one gospel, one edict, one rape, one revisionist history at a time, backed up by very real violence, women have had their natural rights to life and liberty and property and justice neatly excised and kept in a box for safekeeping. In nearly every civilization for ten thousand years of recorded history.

If we don't call that an atrocity, it is only because the word is not large enough to contain such atrociousness.
> They sound like very reasonable proposals, that I would think most people with common sense with accept. I especially find interesting the proposal to use R&D for the pharmaceutical industry from the Government. I just don't know how practical that is. It would need serious commitment and serious investment from Governments to do that.

So I've worked in government-sponsored defense R&D. If you think all the patent litigation creates inefficiency in the system, you can't even imagine how much inefficiency is created by government funding of research.

Government funded research is absolutely necessary. There are tons of things the free market would not naturally invest in without government funding. Government funding is necessary to create products, like the internet, that the market doesn't necessarily know it wants yet. But that comes at the cost of monstrous inefficiency. It's not often the case that the politically-important subjects of research are the same as the economically-important subjects of research. You see this in medical R&D, which is heavily funded in the US by NIH grants and the like. Tremendous funding goes to researching end-of-life diseases like cancer and alzheimer's (probably because they affect old people and old people vote), and relatively little goes to research to improve the health and quality of life for working-age people.
From people I've talked to who were there at the time, the basic answer is: technical debt. All their hacker bravery and Netscape Time drama had yielded a code base "just too complicated and crufty and hard to modify". Damned if they rewrote, and damned if they didn't.
This is, sadly, completely opposite to what we try to advocate with PyPy, which is you should not sacrifice your abstractions in favor of performance and you should not need to rewrite in C, barring few corner cases, like writing kernels.

Surprisingly enough, I happen to have a talk when I discuss this precise topic, for people with a 30min to kill. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHF5Aius_Qs&feature=youtu...